Allowed

Dr.P.Sivasabaapathi, v. the State Rep.by the Inspector

Madras HC12 Feb 2020CRL OP/25237/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single-judge High Court of Madras, on a criminal original petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a chargesheet, directed the trial court to expedite proceedings in C.C. No. 180/2014 and completely dispensed with the petitioner's appearance for routine stages.

What did the court decide?

Directs the trial court to expedite and complete the trial in C.C. No. 180/2014 and dispenses with petitioner's appearance.

Dr.P.Sivasabaapathi, Vs the State Rep.by the Inspector — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 12.02.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.25237 of 2014 and

¶6

MP.Nos. 1 & 2 of 2014

¶7

Dr.P.Sivasabaapathi

¶8

...Petitioner

¶9

Vs. The State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Yercaud Police Station, Salem District. ...Respondent Prayer: Petitions filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking to call for the records and to quash the Charge Sheet in CC.No.180/2014 dated 05.11.2013 filed by the Respondent police and pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.V, Salem.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sivasankar For Respondent :.Mr.C.Iyyapparaj, Additional Public Prosecutor ORDER

¶11

This criminal original petition has been filed seeking to call for the records in C.C.No.180/2014 pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate No.V, Salem and quash the same.

¶12

2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that without going into the merits of the case, it would suffice, if this Court issues direction to the Trial Court to expedite the trial and complete the same as early as possible. He would further submit that the appearance of the petitioner before the Trial Court may be dispensed with and would further submit that the petitioner is ready to appear as and when necessary.

¶13

3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent concede to the request made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

¶14

1/2

¶15

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶16

4.In view of the above, this Court directs the learned Judicial Magistrate No.V, Salem, to expedite the trial in C.C.No. 180/2014 and complete the same as early as possible. The appearance of the petitioners before the Trial Court is dispensed with. However, this order will not stand on the way of the Trial Court to insist for the appearance of the petitioners for receiving copies under Section 207 of Cr.P.C., framing of charges, questioning under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. and judgment and as and when the Trial Court feels it necessary.

¶17

5.With the above directions, this criminal original petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶18

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CCC)
/True Copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1.The Judicial Magistrate No.V,
Salem.
2.The The Inspector of Police,
Yercaud Police Station,
Salem District.
3.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
AKM/13.03.2020/2P-4C /
Crl.O.P.No.25237 of 2014
and
MP.Nos. 1& 2 of 2014

¶19

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶20

2/2

Dr.P.Sivasabaapathi, v. the State Rep.by the Inspector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr.P.Sivasabaapathi, v. the State Rep.by the Inspector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amutha Meenakshi, Vs State Byinspector of Police

Kotteeswaran Vs the State Rep.by

Aiyub Vs State Rep. by

K.Arumugam, S/O.S.Kandan, Vs the State Rep.by Deputy

N.Subash Vs State Rep. by

Aiyub Vs State Rep by